Language Support

5/15/19

The United States public school system has created four main structures for educating culturally and linguistically diverse students. W.P. Thomas and V.P. Collier published, A national study of school effectiveness for language minority students’ long-term academic achievement in 2002. Based on their research conducted on program models, the following are ranked from least effective to most effective: English as a Second Language, Transitional Bilingual Education, Developmental Bilingual Education, and Two-Way Immersion. If you have a similar experience to me, in Kentucky I have only seen ESL programs in practice. The facts from Thomas & Collier however, do not support our state’s belief in educating our ESL population. -ESL programs are the least effective in providing appropriate language and literacy accommodations -ESL programs are the most costly program -ESL programs are grounded in SUP instead of CUP (click the linguistics tab to learn more about SUP & CUP) Thomas & Collier’s research does support an education that combines learning in both L1 & L2 for 4 or more years in early education. If research consistently supports a different method for teaching our CLD students, why is there not change in policy or practice to best meet the needs of students? What can we as teachers do to better support CLD students in our classroom when district policy places constraints on what we have the ability to provide? Why are teachers not expected to have more exposure to a second language in their collegiate education if our school systems continue to grow in diversity?